hello and welcome to kqed newsroom. i'm thuy vu. coming up on our show, the latest push by senate republicans to repeal obamacare is now in jeopardy. and it was just 30 years ago that women were finally allowed to be firefighters in san francisco. we'll talk with two of the department's early trail blazers. plus in our ongoing series of interview with gubernatorial candidates, meet john chiang, the state treasurer who is aiming for california's top job. but first it was billed as free speech week, a series of talks to start this sunday at uc berkeley including milo yiannopoulos. earlier this week, the conservative student group organizing the event insisted the event would go on as scheduled despite missing deadlines and an escalating war

of words with campus officials. confusion continues to swirl around the event. today the berkeley patriot told kqed the event was being canceled while may loilo yiannos said it wasn't. joining me now is the faculty member. more than 200 faculty members signed the letter. what's your reaction to the confusing developments today? >> i think this confusion part of the problem. it speaks to the chaotic organization of the event itself. that chaos, i believe, breeds danger. i think it breeds threat. it means that this event is going to be hard to contain. it's going to be hard to police. and it threatens the kind of violence that those of us that led the boycott are most eager to avoid. >> do you think university officials should have allowed this event to happen in the first place? >> no, i don't. i think that the university of california at berkeley is an institution of higher learning dedicated to the production, preservation and dissemination

of new knowledge. that is our role. and the everyday free flow of ideas and free speech is what we do every day on the job. milo yiannopoulos is a provocateur. he is peddling discredited ideas that have no place on a public campus. if he wants to speak, then he can rent the paramount theater in oakland and sell tickets at the front door. the university of the california is not obligated to provide him with a platform. >> but it is the home of free speech. there are those who will say even provocateurs should have a platform, that the first amendment is very clear on this. under the first amendment, all speech, even hate speech, is protected. >> yes. they have a right in an abstract constitutional sense, yes. on the one hand, the boycott such as it is almost accepts milo's right to speak. in fact, i'm not really worried about milo's words. we know what he's going to say. i'm worried about milo's followers, the alt-right activists that follow him. that on january 20th at the university of washington shot

somebody, a milo supporter shot someone. we saw what happened in charlottesville in which alt-right activists beat students into a coma and then murdered heather heyer in charlottesville. berkeley is not interested in becoming the next charlottesville and inviting milo is exactly what could result in this. >> have you seen alt-right activists already on campus? >> yes, they're already here. they've been coming in since the ben shapiro talk. they've been coming in. they're sort of milling around campus. they're planning an alt-right parade in berkeley on sunday. so the concern is that even if milo calls this off, you know, there's dueling press conferences that say it's on again, off again. his followers are already here and already doing damage. >> they chased you across campus at one time? >> a group of proud boys spotted me, and, you know, i think like -- i don't know that they saw me in particular. i think they saw a faculty member and took an undue interest in me. >> you know, one of the issues here, though, is that cal has

become such a flash point for the whole debate over free speech. if uc berkeley had said no to the event like you wish they had, don't they risk being further criticized by right-wing groups as being intolerant of conservative views and shutting down free speech? >> i think there are conservatives on campus. there are conservatives in the faculty. john yu teaches at the law school. it's not exactly that berkeley is hostile to conservative speech. but this particular version of the alt-right, which i genuinely believe is a form of fascism that is trying to invade our campus and use the noble and enlightened, liberal idea of free speech universalism and they're using that to shoe horn their way into a public university when of course we know these people would never exchange -- return free speech rights to their opponents and will drop the precept as soon as it ceases to suit their purposes. so i think they're being sort of rank hypocrites. but the real problem is the kind of violence they bring, that i

believe this kind of fascist intolerance has no place on a public university campus or campuses of any kind. >> in your letter, you had talked about a different kind of violence as well. in that open letter, you wrote, quote, it is not just physical violence that our campus faces from this media circus. what do you mean by that. >> >> i think what we're talking about is the online harassment in which activists and students and others have their personal information displayed off the is internet and the dark web so as to bring online harassment that can lead to physical violence. millennials tend not to be free speech absolutist in the same way that baby boomers were because millennials have grown up, and these are my students, right? they've grown up in a landscape in which free speech basically means they have to face sexist harassment on the internet every day. cyber bullying doesn't end when you turn 18. it happens to adults too, right? it happens to professors and intellectuals and there's large numbers of us on the berkeley

campus and in colleges across the country who show up to work every day with death threats hanging over our heads from people like this. and the university is inviting them physically to come to our campus. >> what do you think the university should do at this point about free speech week? >> i think it should be canceled. >> even now? >> yes, absolutely. we're already seeing an increase in hate crimes on the campus, violent incidences of people being, again, harassed online, chalking on campus. these events are growing. they're escalating, right? this isn't going to go away. it's going to get worse as this event gets closer. >> a university spokesman has told us this event will go on and the university will not be the ones to cancel it. if anyone cancels it, it has to be the organizing groups and that seems to be where things stand ou. >> that's his point of view and i think his position is this is out of the university's hands. the university of california is somehow hamstrung by a student group of less than a dozen

members and big money breitbart donations behind them. i think the university is being held hostage and it needs to take a less legalistic line and a values based line. i believe in the university of california. i love public education and public higher education, and i see milo as an unprecedented attack on the values of public higher education in the state of california. >> professor, thank you for being with us. >> thank you. it's been a pleasure. turning now to health care, the latest attempt to repeal and replace obamacare is in jeopardy. the cassidy/graham proposal would end the expansion of medicaid and federal subsidies for lower income people to buy insurance. it would instead give block grants to individual states. but republican senator john mccain has just refused to back the plan. joining me now to make sense of the latest developments are kqed health reporter april dem bosque and kqed senior editor scott shafer. welcome to you both. >> thank you. >> april, why is senator mccain

opposing this latest gop proposal to repeal the aca? >> the same reason he opposed the previous versions. he's opposed mainly on procedural grounds. he said a policy that affects this many people and this much money should go through a deliberative process, a debate. it shouldn't be rushed through the way that this bill is being rushed through. >> and in the last few days there's been a torrent of criticism as well. who is criticizing it? >> doctor groups, patient groups, hospitals, insurance companies. >> just about everybody. >> are all opposed to this bill. they're opposed, you know, because so many -- because of the funding redistribution. a lot of states stand to lose a lot of money, which means that under this bill, millions of people are going to lose coverage, which would compromise care and also the consumer protections that are part of obamacare would also be eroded. >> but there are some that believe that the government -- federal government is spending too much money on health care

and it makes sense to give the money back to states, right? >> yeah, they're called republicans. that's part of the deal here. they want to just not create these block grants on medicaid. they want to cap it. now, states if they need more money for medicaid, they get more money for medicaid. it's kind of becoming a bigger and bigger percentage of the federal budget, and that is one thing that concerns republicans. that's why they want to cap it. >> why were the republicans in such a rush to get this to a vote by next week? >> well, the simple answer is that after september 30th, it would require 60 votes instead of just 50 to get this passed because it's part of -- it's arcane senate rules that this is technically part of the budget reconciliation, but october 1st is the new fiscal year so that no longer applies and they'll need 60 votes. they can hardly get 50. some people see this as their last chance to repeal obamacare. >> so the senate has 52 seats, republican seats, and then senator rand paul of kentucky has indicated he will probably vote no, and susan collins has some doubts about the bill as well. so what does this mean exactly?

is the aca dead for real, or it may come up again? >> you mean repealing and replacing the aca? you know, one thing that i've learned in the last nine months covering health care is never say never. every time, you know, we thought this was over. >> it's like a cat. it has nine lives. >> zombie. >> given the deadline, things are looking pretty grim for getting this passed. with another week or so to go, who knows what they might come up with. >> you agree? >> you know, it does seem to keep coming back. but, you know, at the same time if it were to pass and the president were to sign it, it would create a lot of problems for these same senators because in a lot of these states, many people are going to lose -- would lose health insurance. we don't even know for sure yet how many because the congressional budget office hasn't actually scored the bill. but there's a lot of anxiety out there about people who are afraid of, you know, either losing their health insurance

altogether or losing some of the protections they now have against losing it over pre-existing conditions. so, you know, i think it could fuel a lot of anxiety and there could be a backlash over that as well. >> with the cassidy/graham bill now in limbo, does it open the door wider for something like the single payer health care idea among the wider public? >> well, you know, i think throughout this debate, consumers have really learned a lot about health care and health care costs. and i think especially in california, we see single payer as very, very popular. on practical terms, i think it's a very, very heavy lift. >> yeah, it's -- you know, there's a bill making its way through the legislature. it passed the senate, that would begin the process of creating a single payer system in california. there's a lot of questions, though. it got stuck in the assembly. it's now going to be taken up next year. it's become kind of a litmus test, this support for single payer, among democrats. the california nurses association is pushing really hard on this, and i think some democrats are concerned that if they don't support it, they're

going to get primaried. you know, someone who does support single payer health insurance could run against them in a primary, and so there's a lot of pressure to pass it . at the same time, there's a lot of questions about how you would pay for it. $400 billion is the price tag, and now with federal money uncertain, it even makes it a heavier lift. >> and gavin newsom and bernie sanders were both at an event in san francisco today promoting the idea of single payer health care. >> and senator sanders introduced a bill that would create single payer nationwide, but he said there's no chance that's going to pass. he wants states like california to do it so that we can become sort of the laboratories of innovation. but as we've been saying, it's a heavy lift here as well, and even governor brown has expressed some real doubts about where's the money going to come from. but at the same time, there's the simplicity to saying let's get rid of all the insurance companies and the co-pays and high deductibles and all that, and let's just have one single payer, the government, run health care. >> and that's what's so

attractive to it i think in the public, and it polls very well. there's a lot of support for single payer. but then when you introduce the question, all right, well what if you would have to pay more in taxes to pay for single payer? >> not so much. >> all right. we're going to have it leave it there. scott shafer and april dembosky, thank you both. >> thanks. to state politics now. john chiang has been california's state treasurer since 2015. he's now campaigning for a much bigger job, california's next governor. while he may not be as well known as the other candidates, chiang thinks his fiscal experience and years of public service will resonate with voters in 2018. scott shafer spoke earlier with democratic gocandidate john chiang. >> thanks for coming? . >> great to be here. >> we're going to have a new governor in 2019. the election is next year. why are you the perp son to tak jerry's brown's place this. >> i think i have that deep

passion about people. i want to make sure that california continues to be and even reach greater heights and be in that place where people come for greater social and economic mobility. >> how do you ensure that? >> i think i've done that. first of all, you have to make sure that you have a strong financial and economic foundation for the state. in california's history, i'm the only person who has served in all three public funds and finance offices. so when we had that financial crisis, in part it was my leadership that helped california move out of that very difficult time in 2008-2009. >> in the recent poll, 75% of people, voters, said they don't know enough about you to have an opinion of you. tell us a little bit about yourself. if know your parents were taiwanese immigrants and you grew up in chicago area, illinois. what was it like for you as a kid growing up in the suburbs of chicago? >> it was a very different time. we know that it was very racially charged back then. so i was born in the early 1960s in america. we were the first asian-pacific american family in our community

in suburban chicago, so we faced that discriticism nation. we would have ugly racial epithets spray painted on our garage, rocks thrown to our window. we would face many taunts as i would go to school. but others overcame. my family overcame, and in part that's why i went into public service. i cared about social and economic change. >> one of the issues bubbling up again is affirmative action and african-americans and latinos seem to see it in one way, often different from asian-americans. what are your thoughts about affirmative action? >> i believe in affirmative action. we have a long ways to reach our greatest ideals that everybody gets to participate. everybody gets the embrace in our public society. some of the asian-americans are afraid because they faced that discrimination. here in san francisco, we know this city was formed in part because people were discriminated from the mining industry, from going for gold and came here and became -- own the restaurants, worked as dry cleaners, so they're afraid of the discrimination they faced in the past. we have to make sure we expand

the opportunities. we make sure that everybody understands that this is an inclusive society so that they don't operate from a perspective of fear but one where they understand that they're valued. >> you have joked about being not the most charismatic in the field. some would say gavin newsom or former l.a. mayor antonio villaraigosa. how do you make up for that? >> some are more flashy, but i believe in action and substance. when you think about today here in san francisco and northern california and southern california, we have major homelessness issues. we have major housing issues. so who is actually taking the bold action? let the actions speak instead of just the words. so, you know, i've worked to increase financing and building affordable housing by 80% in my 2 1/2 years. you can talk about doing something in the future, or you actually can show precedent, take action, and demonstrate to people. we're actually putting a roof over your head. i actually hear you not only through my ears but through my heart. i want to make sure you have a

better life. >> another big issue is transportation. the legislature just passed a tax on gasoline, 12 cents a gallon. one democratic state senator is facing a recall because he voted for it. would you vote for that? >> i actually would. we have to make sure we have a world class infrastructure. people comment all the time whether you live outside california or within california, our roaded have been underinvested in. we're losing massive quality of life and productivity because people are stuck on the highways. the great minds that live up here in the bay area shouldn't be sitting on the roads for an hour or an hour and a half. they ought to be at home taking care of their kids, taking them to soccer games, doing other things that are meaningful and important to them. >> some of those great minds in the bay area are thinking about things like robotics and artificial intelligence and driverless vehicles and that makes a lot of people nervous. what are your thoughts and how would you approach that issue of the middle class worried about being invented out of a job? >> we're going to have to make sure lifelong education is available whether it's immediate

access to community college for training programs or other types of efforts, our workforce investments are there to people can remain employed. >> i want to ask you a few questions. if you can keep it to yes and no, that would be great. did you support prop 64 to legalize marijuana? >> i did. i voted for it. there was obviously some major shortcomings that i'm working on today in regards to the cannabis banking, but i thought it's important that we move forward and try to address some of the criminal justice, social justice issues. >> have you ever tried it? >> i tried it once in high school. >> i know that you're -- on a serious note, your own family has been the victim of serious crime and i'm wondering if you think the death penalty is ever called for? >> so my sister was murdered. so the -- i have personal reservations, right, but the voters chose to pass the death penalty and reinfoshrce the dea penalty. i think we should follow the law. >> also high speed rail. the voters also approved high

speed rail years ago but it's become controversial. it's become expensive. it's been a priority for governor brown to use some funds from the cap and trade money to fund high speed rail. would you continue doing that as governor? >> i want to make sure that we continue to go forward and make sure that we put high speed rail on a sustainable financial path. so in the near future we're going to have to find some private sector financing. there's simply at this point not enough money in the general fund to pay for all of it. >> would you continue using the cap and trade money? >> we'll continue to have that conversation. >> what's your inclination? what are the pros and cons? >> that would be part of the mix, but obviously we need more money. >> state treasure john chiang, i'm sure we'll see you again as the campaign unfolds. thanks for coming in. let's turn now to local history. for years the san francisco fire department did not allow women in its ranks. some thought they weren't up to the job. >> these women, everything is going to take a little bit longer for them to perform. all the functions that they're going to perform are going to take a little bit longer, and that's the difference. a couple seconds between saving

somebody's life and losing it. >> then in 1987, the san francisco fire department was ordered by a federal judge to allow women on its force. the department's first female firefighters are now being honored 30 years later for proving women could excel at this tough, dangerous job and help to change its culture. joining me now are two of those early trail blazers, san francisco firefighters sheila hunter and sarah ko. >> watching that clip, does it take you back to 30 years ago? >> yes, it does. >> was that what the culture was like? >> yes, it was. that's how the culture was like. and entering into that, it was difficult. it was somewhat difficult at first until you were able to get in and prove yourself, that you can do the job. but there was also -- there was the emotional -- there was like emotional strain because you know although you're there, you're working, you're trying to improve yourself, you know guys

are always thinking, well, okay, this person shouldn't be here. this person is going to take longer to do that. it was like all the negative connotations that are associated with coming into the position, people were actually, you know, that was out there. >> sarah, is that how you felt as well? >> yeah. you felt that you were being watched all the time. everything you did. and, you know, we were -- i felt the department did a really good job in placing us in houses with really good training officers that helped us achieve, you know, our goals in learning the job. and i think that helped a lot kind of change that culture because they were -- they were well respected men in the department, and so that made the big difference, i think, in us

assimilating into the job. >> you were a carpenter? >> yes, i was. >> a union carpenter before you became a firefighter. what made you want to be a firefighter? >> i liked the idea, you know, just the type of job it was, that you were helping people. i felt that i could do the job because i had this background in construction. i was working with tools and things of that, and i also worked out at the sports palace and jim schmidt was the owner, and he helped me prepare for the test and encouraged me there. >> and what were the tests like, sheila? did you train on the same equipment that the men did, and how was that for you? >> yes. we did. there was an outreach program which we were part of, that we participated in, which allowed us to practice on ladders, practice ax swings.

so basically they were set up to simulate everything we would be doing in the field. >> it's hard physical work. >> uh-huh. >> and what about the fire stations themselves when you came in because they were set up for men prior to your arrival. >> right. >> what was that like? you laugh. >> i remember the first days was like, really? because we were sharing the bathrooms and the showers and the whole setup was not geared towards separate facilities, you know. and that came later. >> how long did that go on before you finally got separate bath facilities, sleeping quart quarters. >> there was a bond measure that was voted on i believe around 1992. >> mm-hmm. >> which then separate facility were instituted in the stations. >> you know, in 1987, as you

know, a judge forced the san francisco fire department to start hiring women and minorities after a series of lawsuits. if you think about it, it wasn't that long ago, just 30 years. here was a city, san francisco, that already had its first woman mayor, dianne feinstein. other fire departments around the country already had women firefighters. what is it about san francisco's culture, do you think, at the time that it wasn't as progressive as some of these other places around the country? >> well, sometimes change comes slowly. that's one way to sum it up. although it was something that was happening, that was going to happen, i don't think that was taken to too kindly to put it politely. >> was there hazing? were there bad incidents? >> well, you know, to sum that up, there are incidents -- i'm not going to give you individual ones. but there were incidents maybe

because you're going into this environment in which you really aren't welcome, so you have to try to assimilate as best you can. so, you know, there were instances where people are trying to discourage you, and that was somewhat in the -- i would say that wasn't the whole. i do have to preface it by saying there were people who were also welcoming who wanted to see us succeed, and who were very helpful in us learning our jobs. >> sarah, were there ever any moments where you felt like maybe the men didn't have your back in a fire? were you ever concerned about that? >> no. because once i came in, i think that the department as a whole -- you're a part of a team. they need you all to be together when you go to a fire. you have to be together. >> let me ask you this, sheila.

san francisco now has a woman fire chief. in fact she was one of the trail blazers herself and currently about 16% of the department's firefighters are women. have things improved to a point where you feel it's satisfactory, or what else needs to change? >> i think there has been some improvement. actually just by having a woman fire chief and also having women in key positions, chief positions, officer positions, i think that is great. >> it sets an example. >> exactly. and women are going to be more inclined to want to work for the fire department and look at fire service as a career. >> well, thank you both for coming in and sharing your stories. you're both inspirations. i want to note that there's a special reception this saturday honoring trail blazers like you at 111 minute gallery hosted by the united fire service women. congratulations again on the 30th anniversary. >> thank you. >> thank you very much.

and that will do it for us. you can find more of our coverage at kqed.org/newsroom. i'm thuy vu. thank you for joining us.

>> it's not over. republicans take another shot at dismantling the affordable care act. but the clock is ticking. i'm robert costa. we look at the sudden push on capitol hill. plus, escalating tensions between the u.s. and north korea. tonight, on "washington week." >> here's the test for republicans. did we work as hard to repeal obamacare as they did to pass it? >> senate republicans revive efforts to overhaul the affordable care act. but as the clock ticks down, can they get 50 republican votes? >> there are many concerns that i have about the graham-cassidy proposal. >> i promised repeal. i didn't promise i would sort of keep most of it. >> democrats remain united in opposition. >> are we not going to rest until this horrible deal, worse than the last one, is dead?